Outside the Box

The Election, the Presidency, and Foreign Policy

Options

The closer we
get to the presidential election, the more we are bombarded with facts,
opinions, predictions, and the like from both ends of the political spectrum.

One thing I
like about this analysis from my friend and geopolitical expert George Friedman
is that he starts off with an obvious yet understated fact: you can't believe
what presidential candidates say. Not because they are pathological liars, but
because they must make promises that, once elected, they cannot keep, given the
reality of the office.

Whether or not
you buy the idea that presidents have much less power than we think, George's
assessment of each candidate in terms of foreign policy is as unbiased and
dispassionate as they come – definitely worth some considered thought.

If you like
this piece, I suggest you check out George's company, Stratfor. They publish
geopolitical analysis, and a subscription to their website and email alerts is
one of the best ways to stay smart about what's going on in the world and how
it might affect your investment portfolio. <<Click
here to access a special discount on a 1-year subscription>>, plus
get a complimentary copy of George's bestselling book, The Next Decade.

Each day, you get the three tech news stories with the biggest potential impact.

The Election, the Presidency and Foreign Policy

July 31, 2012

By George Friedman

The American presidency is designed to disappoint. Each candidate must promise things that are beyond his power to deliver. No candidate could expect to be elected by emphasizing how little power the office actually has and how voters should therefore expect little from him. So candidates promise great, transformative programs.…

Permalink

Options

Like Outside the Box? Then we think you'll love John's premium
product, Over My Shoulder. Each week John Mauldin sends his Over
My Shoulder subscribers the most interesting items that he
personally cherry picks from the dozens of books, reports, and
articles he reads each week as part of his research.
Learn more about Over My Shoulder.

Discuss This

Comments

Jim Buslepp

Aug. 8, 2012, 3:34 p.m.

Events drive things to an extent, but the President’s responses can make a lot of differences. After the World Trade Center was bombed in the early 90’s, President Clinton responded to it as a criminal matter. In due course those involved were dead or in prison. No wars were fought over it.

How would things have been different if President Bush had taken a similar approach?

It’s interesting that it took a more investigative approach by another Democratic President to finally take out the leadership of al Queda.

Gerald Ferguson

Aug. 3, 2012, 5:07 p.m.

Remember how Britain tried to maintain a balance of power, for example opposing France when they were stronger, and allying with France when Germany was stronger.Ended up ruining Britain. The USSR collapsed because of internal contradictions, not American belligerency. Russia is a sick sister. China is careful with its growing strength. The US is constrained by misunderstanding its own financial system, as if we were still on the Gold standard.

Thomas Childs

Aug. 3, 2012, 12:27 p.m.

It seems to me that Mr. Friedman is doing a white-wash job the likes of which I would not have thought possible on his website. The Obama presidency circumscribed in its powers to manipulate and skew the management of the American society?? That is simply too unpleasantly inaccurate to seriously consider! The raft of un-documented, un-vetted Czars, the utterly cynical use of un-constitutional executive privilege in virtually dictating to Congress, the Supreme Court, and the People how â€œChangeâ€ should be construed!!! Hell, letâ€™s call a spade a spade! Obama has managed to convert Washington and Jeffersonâ€™s magnificent Republic into a banana republic tyranny! A Stalinist style police state! A Nazi goon-run dictatorship!! And with 140 million gun owners not likely to accept a pending dictum criminalizing them all â€“ there WILL be trouble!

Don Bishop

Aug. 3, 2012, 10:26 a.m.

Domestically the President has enormous power through the regulatory processs. A case in point is Obama’s war on fossil fuels; he clearly stated before the 2008 election that he would bankrupt coal companies, and through EPA edicts he is moving in that direction.

Steve Herr

Aug. 3, 2012, 8:51 a.m.

I agree that the President, and for that matter the Congress, is weaker than most people think. However I see a different reason. The President and Congress are just pawns of the military and it’s associated industrial complex. The predictions of President Eisenhower have come true in spades. Polls show that the American People want out of Afghanistan by a two to one margin and yet even a Democratic President cannot pull it off. Anyone who thinks we are there for “strategic” reasons is a fool. We are there because it is good business. Witness the current debate about the “fiscal cliff”. It appears that we need to maintain a ruinous level of military spending forever so that we don’t loose jobs. Of course we will not be able to maintain this level of spending forever. The real question will be: What do the supporters of the military industrial complex do when they have bankrupted the country? Germany in World War II might be a good example. Let’s pray not!

John Hunter

Aug. 3, 2012, 1:26 a.m.

The revelation that there is little difference between presidential-candidate policies when they reach office, may not be news to many people. What is evident at this pre-election stage is that the challenger has more freedom to weigh in with the gun-toting rhetoric of the Bush era to impress the red-necks. By any measure, Romney is unelectable and it really doesn’t matter what he says—he will never be in a situation to deliver on promises. And I suspect that the fact anyone takes any notice is more to do with the American love of a parade, rather than anything of substance.

But there has been a substantial shift in thinking on both sides of politics since the last war in Iraq. What is referred to in the article above as ‘American Interests’ is really about oil and energy. For most of the last century and a part of this one, America chose to focus efforts for its ‘balancing’ very carefully so that they aligned with energy supply. The morality argument was used only when convenient. Now there is a stark realization that the US must become self-sufficient in energy and take this out of the balancing act.

Jack Hiller

Aug. 2, 2012, 1:43 p.m.

This article is either amazingly stupid, given the intelligence and knowledge of the writer, or dissingenuous. The incumbent President’s actions have been marked by Executive orders that effectively violate law (e.g., amnesty for illegal immigrants and disregard for welfare work rules), disregard of court orders (e.g., the offshore drilling ban in the Gulf of Mexico), pursuit of a Green agenda not approved by the Congress (e.g., funding Solindra and placing the Gov last for bankruptcy, as well as “blocking the Canadian pipeline otherwise approved, and pursuit of economically impractical regulation thru the EPA).
This President has acted as King, not bound by the courts and legislation. How could Freedman have missed seeing this extreme Presidential behavior ?

Outside the Box is a free weekly economic e-letter by best-selling author and renowned financial expert, John Mauldin. You can learn more and get your free subscription by visiting www.MauldinEconomics.com.

Please write to subscribers@mauldineconomics.com to inform us of any reproductions, including when and where copy will be reproduced. You must keep the letter intact, from introduction to disclaimers. If you would like to quote brief portions only, please reference www.MauldinEconomics.com.

Outside the Box and MauldinEconomics.com is not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and those that he interviews. Any views expressed are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest and is not in any way a testimony of, or associated with, Mauldin's other firms. John Mauldin is the Chairman of Mauldin Economics, LLC. He also is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA) which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states, President and registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS) member FINRA, SIPC, through which securities may be offered . MWS is also a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB) and NFA Member. Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. This message may contain information that is confidential or privileged and is intended only for the individual or entity named above and does not constitute an offer for or advice about any alternative investment product. Such advice can only be made when accompanied by a prospectus or similar offering document. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Please make sure to review important disclosures at the end of each article. Mauldin companies may have a marketing relationship with products and services mentioned in this letter for a fee.

Note: Joining The Mauldin Circle is not an offering for any investment. It represents only the opinions of John Mauldin and Millennium Wave Investments. It is intended solely for investors who have registered with Millennium Wave Investments and its partners at www.MauldinCircle.com (formerly AccreditedInvestor.ws) or directly related websites. The Mauldin Circle may send out material that is provided on a confidential basis, and subscribers to the Mauldin Circle are not to send this letter to anyone other than their professional investment counselors. Investors should discuss any investment with their personal investment counsel. You are advised to discuss with your financial advisers your investment options and whether any investment is suitable for your specific needs prior to making any investments. John Mauldin is the President of Millennium Wave Advisors, LLC (MWA), which is an investment advisory firm registered with multiple states. John Mauldin is a registered representative of Millennium Wave Securities, LLC, (MWS), an FINRA registered broker-dealer. MWS is also a Commodity Trading Advisor (CTA) registered with the CFTC, as well as an Introducing Broker (IB). Millennium Wave Investments is a dba of MWA LLC and MWS LLC. Millennium Wave Investments cooperates in the consulting on and marketing of private and non-private investment offerings with other independent firms such as Altegris Investments; Capital Management Group; Absolute Return Partners, LLP; Fynn Capital; Nicola Wealth Management; and Plexus Asset Management. Investment offerings recommended by Mauldin may pay a portion of their fees to these independent firms, who will share 1/3 of those fees with MWS and thus with Mauldin. Any views expressed herein are provided for information purposes only and should not be construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest with any CTA, fund, or program mentioned here or elsewhere. Before seeking any advisor's services or making an investment in a fund, investors must read and examine thoroughly the respective disclosure document or offering memorandum. Since these firms and Mauldin receive fees from the funds they recommend/market, they only recommend/market products with which they have been able to negotiate fee arrangements.

PAST RESULTS ARE NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THERE IS RISK OF LOSS AS WELL AS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR GAIN WHEN INVESTING IN MANAGED FUNDS. WHEN CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS, INCLUDING HEDGE FUNDS, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER VARIOUS RISKS INCLUDING THE FACT THAT SOME PRODUCTS: OFTEN ENGAGE IN LEVERAGING AND OTHER SPECULATIVE INVESTMENT PRACTICES THAT MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF INVESTMENT LOSS, CAN BE ILLIQUID, ARE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PERIODIC PRICING OR VALUATION INFORMATION TO INVESTORS, MAY INVOLVE COMPLEX TAX STRUCTURES AND DELAYS IN DISTRIBUTING IMPORTANT TAX INFORMATION, ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE SAME REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AS MUTUAL FUNDS, OFTEN CHARGE HIGH FEES, AND IN MANY CASES THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS ARE NOT TRANSPARENT AND ARE KNOWN ONLY TO THE INVESTMENT MANAGER. Alternative investment performance can be volatile. An investor could lose all or a substantial amount of his or her investment. Often, alternative investment fund and account managers have total trading authority over their funds or accounts; the use of a single advisor applying generally similar trading programs could mean lack of diversification and, consequently, higher risk. There is often no secondary market for an investorâ€™s interest in alternative investments, and none is expected to develop.

All material presented herein is believed to be reliable but we cannot attest to its accuracy. Opinions expressed in these reports may change without prior notice. John Mauldin and/or the staffs may or may not have investments in any funds cited above as well as economic interest. John Mauldin can be reached at 800-829-7273.